Athlon II X2 235e vs A4 Micro-6400T
Athlon II X2 235e
A4 Micro-6400T
Performance Spectrum - CPU
About PassMark
PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Athlon II X2 235e is positioned at rank 888 and the A4 Micro-6400T is on rank 843, so the A4 Micro-6400T offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Athlon II X2 235e
Performance Per Dollar A4 Micro-6400T
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Athlon II X2 235e | A4 Micro-6400T |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($15) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Regor (2009−2013) / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Mullins (2014) / 28 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Athlon II X2 235e | A4 Micro-6400T |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($15) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
Performance Check
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Athlon II X2 235e and A4 Micro-6400T
Athlon II X2 235e
The Athlon II X2 235e is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 20 October 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Regor (2009−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.7 GHz, with boost up to 2.7 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,079 points. Launch price was $84.
A4 Micro-6400T
The A4 Micro-6400T is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 29 April 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Mullins (2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1 GHz, with boost up to 1.6 GHz. L2 cache: 2048 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FT3. Thermal design power (TDP): 5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1333. Passmark benchmark score: 1,082 points. Launch price was $69.
Processing Power
The Athlon II X2 235e packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the A4 Micro-6400T offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the A4 Micro-6400T has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.7 GHz on the Athlon II X2 235e versus 1.6 GHz on the A4 Micro-6400T — a 51.2% clock advantage for the Athlon II X2 235e (base: 2.7 GHz vs 1 GHz). The Athlon II X2 235e uses the Regor (2009−2013) architecture (45 nm), while the A4 Micro-6400T uses Mullins (2014) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II X2 235e scores 1,079 against the A4 Micro-6400T's 1,082 — a 0.3% lead for the A4 Micro-6400T. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 240 vs 180, a 28.6% lead for the Athlon II X2 235e that directly translates to higher frame rates.
| Feature | Athlon II X2 235e | A4 Micro-6400T |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 4 / 4+100% |
| Boost Clock | 2.7 GHz+69% | 1.6 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.7 GHz+170% | 1 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | — |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 2048 kB+100% |
| Process | 45 nm | 28 nm-38% |
| Architecture | Regor (2009−2013) | Mullins (2014) |
| PassMark | 1,079 | 1,082 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 240+33% | 180 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 450 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon II X2 235e uses the AM3 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the A4 Micro-6400T uses FT3 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-1333 memory speed. The Athlon II X2 235e supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Athlon II X2 235e) vs 1 (A4 Micro-6400T). PCIe lanes: 0 (Athlon II X2 235e) vs 8 (A4 Micro-6400T) — the A4 Micro-6400T offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.
| Feature | Athlon II X2 235e | A4 Micro-6400T |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | AM3 | FT3 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 3.0+50% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1333 | DDR3L-1333 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 GB+100% | 8 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2+100% | 1 |
| ECC Support | ✅ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 8 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support AMD-V virtualization. The A4 Micro-6400T includes integrated graphics (Radeon R3), while the Athlon II X2 235e requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Athlon II X2 235e targets Energy Efficient Legacy Desktop, A4 Micro-6400T targets Tablet. Direct competitor: Athlon II X2 235e rivals Pentium E5300; A4 Micro-6400T rivals Atom Z3770.
| Feature | Athlon II X2 235e | A4 Micro-6400T |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | Radeon R3 |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | AMD-V | AMD-V |
| Target Use | Energy Efficient Legacy Desktop | Tablet |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Athlon II X2 235e and A4 Micro-6400T
